A Novel Fractional Delay Proportional–Integral Multi-Resonant-Type Repetitive Control Based on a Farrow-Structure Filter for Grid-Tied Inverters

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The submitted paper introduces a frequency-adaptive NF-PIMR-RC approach for grid-tied inverters. I have the following suggestions:

1) Enhance the literature by narrowing the research gap, emphasizing motivation, and including a comparative table for these techniques. Also, list the paper's contributions in bullet points.

2) Is the presented Total Harmonic Distortion (THD) in Figure 12 related to current or voltage waveforms?

3) In Figure 12, please label the subfigures appropriately. Please apply the same labeling convention to other figures as well.

4) As depicted in Figure 15, the proposed approach exhibits an insignificant improvement in THD. The authors should provide justification for the utilization of this method.

5) Enumerate the limitations of the proposed method.

6) Remove the term "novel" from the abbreviation of the controller "NF."

7) Omit Equation (1) from the introduction section.

N/A.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper is of maximum interest to the specialists in the field. It refers to an adaptive NF-PIMR-CR scheme with frequency proposed for grid inverters. The proposed scheme based on the FFD filter obtains flexibly and efficiently the fractional delay with a lower calculation load. I recommend completing the bibliography with some significant titles.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. thanks.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presents study of Novel Fractional delay PIMR-RC used in grid-tied inverters.  Below I attached some questions, editorial mistakes etc., to which the Authors should to assume an attitude:

1. Please, provide the novelty of the paper e.g maybe as bullet points in the introduction section.

2. The Authors mention about presence of higher harmonics in power grid. What is use to measure harmonics ? What should be used ?

3. The conclusion section should be more detailed, considering performed by the Authors analysis.

Minor editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

1. The abstract is quite imperfect and doesn't informative. Please be concise; that should be attractive to the readers.

2. The Introduction is adequate.

3. I need to understand how you could simulate the data, why you chose the methods, and how you could develop your model. The writing is confusing to the readers. However, the analysis part needs more clarification.

4. Please come out with previous findings. Why did you choose the study? What was the contribution of the study? What were the issues? Identify the research gap and come up with the research questions for the study.

5. The discussion part seems to be nothing. Please highlight and link to the previous theories.

6. Can you identify more what the novelty of the study is?

7. In addition, authors need to write about the limitations of their article.

8. The Conclusions are quite imperfect and doesn't informative.

9. The Referencess are relevant.

10. I consider it necessary to make a critical comparison with existing, similar models, thereby highlighting and supporting the advantages of the presented model.

Author Response

Please see the attachment. thanks.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed my previous comment thoroughly. My recommendation is to accept the paper in its current format.

N/A.